Allegheny County nears action on smoking ban

Allegheny County Councilman Mike Finnerty will propose that a vote be taken Tuesday to conduct a public hearing on the proposed smoking ban. If the vote passes, the hearing would be held at 6 p.m. Sept. 5 in the Gold Room of the Allegheny County Courthouse.

The Council’s Health and Human Services Committee is to meet at least once more before putting the ordinance up for a final vote at the end of September.Allegheny County Council will vote within the next two weeks on a smoking ban that would prohibit anyone from lighting up in a bar or restaurant, causing many area bar owners and patrons some anxiety.

The countywide smoking ban would affect all workplaces — including bars, restaurants and the yet-to-be-built slots parlor.

County Council President Rich Fitzgerald said a vote could come as early as the end of September.

Approval appears likely since nine of council’s 15 members are cosponsors — one shy of the 10 votes needed for a veto-proof majority. County Chief Executive Dan Onorato opposes the ordinance, which could take effect within 30 days of passage.

Council members are still trying to decide how to penalize violators. Individuals would face a $25 fine for the first offense, but Fitzgerald said it could be raised to $50. Language might be added to penalize restaurants $100 or $200 for a first offense and strip chronic offenders’ operating licenses.

Enforcement likely will fall to the Allegheny County Health Department, according to Dr. Bruce Dixon, the department’s director.

“We’re stretched pretty thin, so enforcement would come with great difficulty,” Dixon said. “If it does fall on the health department, the one thing that’s clear is that a lot of it will be self-regulating.”

Other cities with smoking bans generally haven’t had enforcement problems because the laws are usually enough to encourage compliance, Dixon said. The health department probably would not hire extra staff to enforce the ban, he said.

“We certainly can’t employ a separate group of people as the smoking police,” he said.

The county is considering adopting the ban against the advice of several powerful county officials, including Onorato and Solicitor Mike Wojcik.

Onorato, according to spokesman Kevin Evanto, supports a statewide ban because he feels local legislation might put Allegheny County at a competitive disadvantage.

Wojcik said the state Clean Indoor Air Act prohibits the county from taking such action and keeps the power to regulate smoking solely with the state. Wojcik’s opinion puts him at odds with Council Solicitor Jack Cambest, who said he believes the law has since changed.

Kevin Joyce, president of the Pennsylvania Restaurant Association, agrees with Wojcik.

The trade organization changed its long-held position opposing smoking bans in June, following the release of a U.S. surgeon general’s report that linked second-hand smoke to increased health risks.

“We believe our historic shift in position will set the table for getting the statewide ban done in the fall,” Joyce said. “The county has an unrealistic timetable. Last month, they passed a resolution supporting a statewide ban, but they haven’t given the Legislature time to react.”

The debate is expected to continue when the Legislature reconvenes in September.

Local Allegheny County reaction

At the Do Drop Inn in Harrison, bartender Bill Singer said that a complete ban on smoking would be a stretch for county officials.

“This is not a positive move,” Singer said. “We have a separate non-smoking area, and I think that’s good enough.”

Jeanne Clark is a server at the Do Drop Inn. She said that while smokers today should show respect for others who may be eating, a smoking ban just won’t work.

“If they want to smoke, they are going to smoke,” Clark said. “Who is going to tell them what to do when they curse you outâ¢ It’s not going to work.”

At the Creighton Hotel in East Deer, manager Terry Osinski said that if a ban is placed on every bar, smoking customers won’t have a choice as to where to go — other than home.

Creighton Hotel customer John Cieslinski is a nonsmoker who thinks the ban is a good idea for restaurants.

However, he isn’t so sure about a nonsmoking bar scene.

“I travel to Florida and New York and people are outside smoking,” Cieslinski said. Both have smoking bans. “I think for bars it’s going to be hard because people go there to relax and enjoy an adult beverage and their vice (smoking).”

Bartender Robbie Merrill at the Frosted Mug in Springdale feels that her customers will be very unhappy if the ban passes.

“I’ve been in the bar business for 22 years and it’s not a good idea,” Merrill said. “Each individual owner should dictate what goes on in their restaurants.”

Frosted Mug customer Bill Baker, however, believes that the ban will be a healthy move for the county.

“Bartenders suck up a lot of smoke,” Baker said. “Healthier people would be a good thing.”

At Tully’s, in Tarentum, customer Jarrod Johns said that a smoking ban “is not going to fly.”

“You work all day to come have a drink and a cigarette, and they’re going to take that away?” Johns said.

Business for Westmoreland

Some local bar owners in Westmoreland County expect a bump in business when the upcoming smoking ban goes into effect in Allegheny County.

Bill Osman, owner of the Freedom Inn in New Kensington, said that although his bar is a small business, he expects to benefit.

“I can see people from Tarentum and Natrona Heights coming over to our bar now,” Osman said. “We’ll definitely pick up some business from across the river.”

Freedom Inn manager Mary Ann Napoli agrees.

“A lot of people come into a bar to relax and smoke,” Napoli said. “It’s definitely going to affect businesses in Allegheny County.”

Osman feared that a smoking ban in Allegheny County could ultimately cause bans in other counties.

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our
Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent
via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.